Werewolf XXVI: The Thing - GAME OVER! THINGS WIN!!!

[st.cronin]

I have a hypothesis, but it requires us to test Barkeep. His behavior has been pretty odd. I encourage those of you who don't feel solid to change their vote to BK.

[hoopsguy]

Cronin, care to share a little more on the hypothesis?

I think the risk/reward ratio on voting for Barkeep to be tested today is pretty good, but if he is telling the truth (and I believe he is) then we are basically forfeiting our chances to get a Thing today.

Lets say that we started with two things, and that they do get to convert every day:

Night 0: 14-2 ratio
Day 1: test JeeberD, revealed scientist (14-2)
Night 1: Barkeep kills Thing, Things convert (13-2)
Day 2: test Barkeep, revealed scientist (13-2)
Night 2: Things convert again (12-3)

POSITIVES:
At that point we are in better shape than we were if Barkeep didn't kill a Thing, plus we have knowledge about two people starting as scientists. Heck, more when you take the "brilliant" thing into play as original scientists.

NEGATIVES:
We are basically forfeiting our chance to be up 13-1 or win the game outright at the end of today's action.

[st.cronin]

Would rather not say more just yet, but I think there is more to his role than you suppose.

[Blade6119]

im happy with saldana or barkeep, but would prefer barkeep

[hoopsguy]

"Barkeep as a Thing" scenario (using same numbers from above):

Night 0: 14-2 ratio
Day 1: test JeeberD, revealed scientist (14-2)
Night 1: Things kill Qwikshot, no conversion (13-2)
Day 2: test someone besides Barkeep who is revealed as scientist (13-2)
Night 2: Things convert for first time (12-3)

We are in the same place going this route as if we test Barkeep, except we don't have the information if he was telling the truth about killing a Thing on Night 1.

But, why would Barkeep make this play? There doesn't seem to be much reason for him to fake a role reveal from the outset of the game, particularly if it seems like a role that might actually be assigned to another player in the game. I don't think that he has bought himself all kinds of clearance through this play. Would he put himself in the limelight like this as a Thing? Put yourself in the position of playing as a "Thing" - under what circumstances would you make a play like this on Day 1?

I can only see it if they start with 3+ players and get to convert every night. Perhaps by being a lightning rod for conversation early he buys time and possibly flushes out a role reveal while the Things mount silent conversions every night. But I don't think Schmidty would set the game up with those parameters.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Would rather not say more just yet, but I think there is more to his role than you suppose.

I hope you're not talking about me because I'm nothing but a crotchlicking motherfucking killer.

[Barkeep49]

And with that I'm out until after the test. Good luck all.

[saldana]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

The one thing that concerns me about voting Saldana instead of you (not that those are the only two choices, just the two I've spent the most time considering) is that if Saldana was a Thing why would he go after Raiders in such a direct fashion?

only have a second to check in while i am at work, but i wanted to comment on this...i can understand the people that think i went strong at raiders and why that draws suspicion on me.. the only answer i have for that is that i, like others in the past, and probably others in this game, forgot that i didnt die when i get the most votes. if you put my reaction into typical werewolf game perspective, instead of in the testing perspective, i think my reaction is totally normal...no one wants to die on day one....put that in comparison to my attitude today, and it is totally different, or indifferent if you would like, because i realized that getting the most votes is not necessarily a bad thing ( it could be bad if the things are using the "convert whoever is tested" plan)

as far as my vote for the day, i know absolutely nothing about this theme, so if cronin has some kind of theory that will help us with the barkeep issue, i will

unvote raiders
vote barkeep

[Raiders Army]

I'm gone until the deadline. Either way, someone will either check out or die as a Thing. One is a very good thing, the other is good, but a temporary goodness.

[st.cronin]

I'm out for the night. My vote stays on Barkeep. I urge others to vote for him - it's a win-win, whereas if we test somebody else and get nothing, we're nowhere.

Plus I think stuff will happen tonight or tomorrow that will make whatever we learn from testing BK quite valuable.

[JeeberD]

I skimmed over the thread pretty quickly, but did we ever figure out why barkeep thinks that Qwik was a Thing?

I'm about to go to the gym and I'm not sure if I'll be back before the vote is final. So unless I hear something good before I take off, I'm leaving my vote on dubb...

[hoopsguy]

I'll be around up until the deadline and won't leave my vote on Saldana if it is going to result in a tie (no testing at all).

That said, I would like to go for a win today instead of just validating that Barkeep is human.

[hoopsguy]

did we ever figure out why barkeep thinks that Qwik was a Thing?

He answered this in Post #317.

[JeeberD]

Thanks, hoops. I really don't like his explanation, though...

[saldana]

all i can say at this point is what i have already said several times, i am a scientist, not a thing...voting for me wont help us get the things, however, i think we should examine cronin's posts...if he is saying a test of barkeep may have further benefits other than clearing him, assuming he is a good guy, that is a bigger benefit than testing me and having me cleared for 12 hours.

thats all i got.

[saldana]

dola, anyone got a vote count?

[hoopsguy]

Here is what I have - would love if someone would double-check it ...

JeeberD - Path (380)
Dubb - JeeberD (261)
Barkeep - Blade (282), Cronin (343), Anxiety (378), Saldana (408)
Saldana - Barkeep (331), Raiders (375), mckerney (385), Hoopsguy (386)
Hoopsguy - Dubb (382), Coffee (388)

Not voted: Swaggs, Tanglewood, WVUFan

[path12]

So ties mean no test and are therefore something to be avoided. I'm not sold on Barkeep being bad yet just because his role is so out of character and my understanding (from others, I haven't seen the movie) is that his likely character is one of the good guys. So:

UNVOTE JEEBER
VOTE SALDANA

Kind of funny to have a game where you're not stressed about being voted. Though that might just be the medication.

[hoopsguy]

Boy, I really have not figured out the ebb-and-flow of this game. Figured we would have some people around near the end to generate some conversation.

I can flip votes to Barkeep and change this result, but I believe him and I suspect Saldana. Saldana, any last words before testing here?

[hoopsguy]

Tanglewood - any comments?

[hoopsguy]

Off to see 24, hope that results are posted in an hour and that we have one more vote as part of this day.

[Swaggs]

Crap... sorry I missed the vote.

Long day.

[dubb93]

So no testing tonight?

[dubb93]

So no testing tonight?

[dubb93]

Nothing but trouble with this damn board recently.

[Schmidty]

After the death of Qwikshot, everyone's nerves are frayed beyond belief. The challenges, denials, and arguments fly.

It is finally decided that saldana will be the target of the test. You all get up from the table and give saldana some room. For what seems like forever, saldana just sits and stares at the razor without moving. Everyone begins to get tense. Finally, the tension breaks into anger, and several of you move in on saldana. Two of you grab his arm and hold it down, but it is apparant that he is giving no signs of struggle. One of you grabs the razor, and without hesitation, slices into saldana's thumb. No sooner than the razor tears the skin, saldana explodes from his chair, throwing those of you nearest to him across the room. His mouth widens to freakish proportions and some type of disgusting appendage shoots from it toward the center of your group, but it never reaches you as a plume of flame engulfs him and tosses him to the floor. It seems that someone has fashioned a makeshift flame-thrower out of the blowtorch.

Writhing in agony, saldana slowing burns to ashes before your eyes.


You have tested and killed a Thing, and may now vote for another person to be tested before the day is over.

[tanglewood]

Well, I would think it useful to test Barkeep and see if he is being straight with us, but as I suspect that he is and his weird acting is some special role (I haven't seen the movie but suspect that Barkeep is playing one of the characters in it. Can anyone confim?) and therefore would rather test somone that I think could be a Thing.

Regarding the whole brilliant thing again, I am very weary of how it has been presented so far by/surrounding one player in particular: Hoopsguy. This is farily long, but I am trying to be exhaustive in proving my point, no matter how minor it may seem to some, and want to get a consensus on exactly who was cleared by the PM business on day one and why.

Guys that said brilliant in their posts that I believe has cleared them on Day 1
Swaggs - post #107 (slips brilliant into conversation in a deliberate way, would only be picked up on if you got brilliant in PM)
Blade - post #110 (as above, only more explicit as it is openly self referential)
Raiders Army - post #123 (explicit quotation of part of the PM)

RA says he thinks Blade is on his side because of his brilliance in #174, essentially bringing the whole brilliance in PMs issue into the open. From this point on anyone who uses brilliant could easily be a thing, it is from post #174 useless.

Then, in post #183 Dubb confirms that he also got 'simple but brilliant' in his PM. He was the first to confirm this part, so he is cleared. However, as with 'brilliant', as soon as it is openly confirmed it is now obsolete so cannot be used to cofirm anyone beyond post #183.

So, the main point of this post: why are we (or at least some of us) clearing Hoopsguy along with them? Here is Hoops' first, and therefore most important, reference to brilliant:

Originally Posted by Hoopsguy (#180

Raiders, if we are coming out with the "brilliant" bit then you actually missed someone who said it - Swaggs.

The first time Hoops mentions brilliant is after three players have already hid it in their posts, which, as I said in my previous post RE: this whole brilliant buisness, an experienced wolf/thing could easily pick up on and imitate. All he mentions is the single word with no reference to "simple, but brilliant", the explicit quote, even though that is what Raider's used in his post so had already been out in the open. Dubb was the first to confirm 'simple but brilliant', and did so after Hoops' post here. Additionally, (although not necessarily to Hoops' inditement) The phrasing "'brilliant' bit" is very vague. Hoops' could argue that he was trying to 'protect' the exact PM wording and keep it useful, but it was already out in the open. If he had used it here, he would have been the one to at one make 'simple but...' obsolete but simultaneously clear himself, unlike Dubb who did so. It would have not changed our situation at all, perhaps have even been beneficial.

His post continues thusly, the self-quotation he makes I have underlined:

Originally Posted by Hoopsguy (#180, cont.)

I had seen this when I posted in #143 but didn't want to bring this out.

but I don't have any good "reads" at this point (at least on who might be a "thing).

If you read between the lines, you can construe that I had some reads on who might be a scientist and it was because of the use of the word brilliant, which was found in my scientist description.

To me, this could well be some good wolfish bullshitting. Hoops has laid these types of false 'textual clues' before to great effect when a bad guy, notably the Star Wars game, where an ambiguos sentence of two can then be twisted post-facto to appear as a reference to something which the bad guy has only become aware of recently.

Therefore, I do not see any reason that Hoops was part of the brilliant group, so he is not one of the confirmed clear on Day one and should not get the special protection afforded the others (Swaggs, Blade, RA and Dubb).

I am by no means accusing Hoops of being a thing, only that it is not a 100% lock he wasn't a thing on day one, as some seem to have suggested by including him in the 'brilliant' group.

Therefore, I am not accusing Hoops but am not writing him out of possibilties either. Due to my strong hunch that Barkeep is good, and agreeing partly with RA's logic of going for Saldana (but only in a 'well, it's as good as any other reason at this point' kind of way), especially since he was 100% guarenteed clean when he made the accusation, I will:

Vote Saldana

[Coffee Warlord]

Well then.

[Schmidty]

Day 1 is being extended until 9 p.m. EST tomorrow, or until everyone votes.

[tanglewood]

Originally Posted by hoopsguy

Tanglewood - any comments?

1. WOO HOO WE GOT A THING!

2. DAMN I THOUGHT THE DEADLINE WAS 3AM GMT AGAIN!!!!


Well, as you can see from my post it was horrendously long and I spent ages writing it especialy considering time hunting for posts etc. and chekcing numbers. It took me at least half an hour to write, so I essentially made up my mind to vote Saldana before I knew the result.


I am truly very sorry I missed the vote, especially sinc ethis is not the first time it has happened due to not doing the timezone conversion correctly (it doesn't help that some games are CST and some EST, but nevermind...). The whole living in the UK thing has caused a lot of difficulty with my participation in WW on this board in the past both with regard to participation and missing vote deadlines. However, I really hope you can all bear patience with me at times as I really enjoy playing the WW games here.

[Schmidty]

Another note: I am going to start using actual names in my write-ups to add more flavor (and mak it easier for me), but note that it is just that: Flavor.

[tanglewood]

Dola

I guess that Hoopsguy voting for Saldana also invalidates my whole 'don't clear Hoops just yet' post too. Great success that was then...

[dubb93]

VOTE HOOPSGUY

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by tanglewood

Dola

I guess that Hoopsguy voting for Saldana also invalidates my whole 'don't clear Hoops just yet' post too. Great success that was then...

He can be devious. I wouldn't put it past him, just like I wouldn't be suprised it both Hoops and Barkeep are things. They seem to be protecting each other quite well while trying to dictate the flow of the game.

[Barkeep49]

And that is why you go for the fucking victory my friends. Go for the fucking victory. Job well done, well done indeed. I just want to point out that I'm 2 for fucking 2 in this game at finding the shitbags we call Things. I have no further suspect at this time, as I feel it's likely a convert so I don't fucking know where to go. I think, however, it would be instructive to either:
*Test me to confirm once and fucking all that Qwik was a bad guy. I mean I went hard after saldana who proved to be one, but maybe some of you still think I'm just a douchebag.
*Go for Jeeber. He seems a likely convert target having been cleared and all yesterday.

But really I'm of open mind now.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by dubb93

He can be devious. I wouldn't put it past him, just like I wouldn't be suprised it both Hoops and Barkeep are things. They seem to be protecting each other quite well while trying to dictate the flow of the game.

Give me a fucking break. If Schmidty had 3 things to start, as you're suggesting, we're more fucked then a giggilo introduced to a tribe of Amazons.

[Barkeep49]

Dola -- So one of us, but not both, can be a Thing. Really my actions today should clear me for today. I went fucking hard after a Thing. What else would you like?

[saldana]

you bastages....my disgusting appendage almost had one of you bastages....go things!!!!

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Give me a fucking break. If Schmidty had 3 things to start, as you're suggesting, we're more fucked then a giggilo introduced to a tribe of Amazons.

Was qwik not a thing now?

[tanglewood]

Originally Posted by dubb93

Was qwik not a thing now?

Start: 2 Things
Night 1: 1 killed (Quik), 1 convert = 2 things
Day 2: 1 lynched = 1 thing

[Barkeep49]

No Qwik was a thing. 3 things to start according to your lame theory:

1. Qwik

And then 2 from the grouping of
Barkeep
Hoops
Saldana

with the remaining being a convert. That's 3 fuckers to start plus 1 convert. Give me a break. You should know better. So you've floated you're theory and it's crap. I'm all for testing me, but the idea that I'm protecting Hoops because we're both things is something that just isn't plausible on Day 2. I fucking led the charge on a Thing. If you want test me and I'll prove innocent so you know that Qwik was a thing. But more then that I want to know what I could fucking do to prove to you that I am just a man trying to destroy evil.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

No Qwik was a thing. 3 things to start according to your lame theory:

1. Qwik

And then 2 from the grouping of
Barkeep
Hoops
Saldana

with the remaining being a convert. That's 3 fuckers to start plus 1 convert. Give me a break. You should know better. So you've floated you're theory and it's crap. I'm all for testing me, but the idea that I'm protecting Hoops because we're both things is something that just isn't plausible on Day 2. I fucking led the charge on a Thing. If you want test me and I'll prove innocent so you know that Qwik was a thing. But more then that I want to know what I could fucking do to prove to you that I am just a man trying to destroy evil.

EEEHHHHH....I'm still not convinced.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by dubb93

EEEHHHHH....I'm still not convinced.

Why not. Let's give some reasons. You can do better.

Screw testing Jeeber, I think it's time I followed his vote.

Vote Dubb

Why play it safe when we can nail a possible cuntrag in Dubb?

[hoopsguy]

So just want to make sure that I'm clear on the argument that I'm a Thing - I voted for Saldana to make the vote 4-3, then didn't change the vote to Barkeep at the end and make the score 5-4 to keep him alive another day and convert another scientist?

Do you really suspect that both Barkeep and I are things? That is the only way that scenario makes any sense to me.

I think that a Thing could afford to be devious if they had not lost one of their members on Day 1. But no way would they play that way and risk losing players the first two days. The people who voted for Saldana, particularly those who were around late (that includes me) vault way up my trust list.

Trusted:
Barkeep (directly related to killing of two Things)
Path (tie-breaking vote to kill a Thing)

Mostly Trusted:
Mckerney (3rd vote on Saldana)
Raiders (Scientist Day 1, voted for Thing on Day 2, posted relatively late and didn't move away from Thing in 5-4 vote)
Cronin (targeted by Thing yesterday)

Somewhat Trusted
Dubb
Swaggs
Blade - all three among simple/brilliant group from Day 1, at most one has been converted
JeeberD - cleared on day one, at most one has been converted among 4 on this somewhat trusted list
Tanglewood - post-deadline vote for Saldana didn't impact the vote, but at least gives some surface area to review. Initial vibe = not Thing

Remaining Players
Anxiety
Coffee
WVUFan

[hoopsguy]

Judging by the reaction from Saldana on Day 1, I believe he was an original Thing and not a convert.

If there was a conversion last night, we are hunting for the convert.

If there was no conversion last night, then they started out with three Things (potentially with Barkeep playing a very dangerous game as a Thing).

I'll be looking at the "Somewhat Trusted" and "Remaining Players" lists that I published for my vote.

[Barkeep49]

Since it worked well before let's look at dubb's posts

Dubb
95 -- Asks to be tested
96 -- Realizes only 1 test a day so thinks we shouldn't test him
100 -- Throws out first overall vote for saldana
111 -- Finds out that vote for saldana doesn't count
120 -- Attempts to vote for saldana
121 -- Really votes for saldana
183 --

Actually I think this hurts you a little in my book Hoopsguy. If you don't quite get the "brilliant" blurb, that leads me to believe you didn't get a simliar PM to what some of the rest of us got. It refers to us as simple, but brilliant . I didn't want to bring that up, but since it is already out in the open I see no problem with it.

What you quoted has nothing to do with that.

191 -- Reminds us all what a bitch it is to edit versus write
198 -- Finds my post stating that I am going to kill someone funny and wonders what everyone else is supposed to do
201 -- Tells me that I'm the man
220 -- Wonders if I'm in the game
223 -- Thanks Schmidty for confirming I'm in the game
254 -- Votes for JeeberD
271 -- Says it's a wasted vote to go after him. Jeebs is more likely convert.
280 -- Hates tornados (I am not making that up, I promise)
281 -- Tells us about the bad storm
382 -- Wants to get an original thing and thinks hoops is it
423 -- Wonders about testing today
424 -- Has the exact same wonder about testing today
425 -- Calls the board "Nothing but trouble"
433 -- Votes for hoopsguy with no explanation
439 -- Asks if I still am saying Qwik was a thing
442 -- Is not convinced by my logic

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by tanglewood

Regarding the whole brilliant thing again, I am very weary of how it has been presented so far by/surrounding one player in particular: Hoopsguy. This is farily long, but I am trying to be exhaustive in proving my point, no matter how minor it may seem to some, and want to get a consensus on exactly who was cleared by the PM business on day one and why.

I am tired of people continuing to talk about stuff that the GM specifically not to talk about when he said, "THERE WILL BE NO MORE DISCUSSION OF PMs IN ANY FORM IN THIS GAME." This is discussion of a form. Maybe you are violating the GM rule because you are trying to throw a monkey wrench into people's thinking and you know that other real scientists can't challenge you without violating the GM's rule.


Vote Tanglewood


-Anxiety

[Barkeep49]

I agree with the idea, based on posts, after my quick review just now, that saldana was an original Thing, henceforth to always be referred to by me as Shitface.

I believe based on the nature of the game we only had 2 shitfaces to start. I honestly believe we got them both.

I also think that it's pretty clear dubb was not a shitface to start. So I'll try and forgive his inability to look at things logically and ask myself "Did he act like he was converted today" and the fact is we just don't fucking now. He's been pretty consistent with his suspsicion of hoops and so I guess it kind of sort of makes sense that he would be suspicious of me. I put him on my cleared list which he doesn't like. At this point I think Dubb is either a converted thing or suffering from tunnel vision. I can't decide which but don't feel comfortable with my vote on him.

Unvote Dubb

It could easly go back, but I think there might be better pickings out there.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I am tired of people continuing to talk about stuff that the GM specifically not to talk about when he said, "THERE WILL BE NO MORE DISCUSSION OF PMs IN ANY FORM IN THIS GAME." This is discussion of a form. Maybe you are violating the GM rule because you are trying to throw a monkey wrench into people's thinking and you know that other real scientists can't challenge you without violating the GM's rule.


Vote Tanglewood


-Anxiety

Schmidty can you clarify what you meant by your post? Anxiety has been looking at it in a pretty literal way, which makes sense, while many of us have taken it more to mean "Don't discuss anything new about PMs." Could you clarify what you want?

[hoopsguy]

The only posts of Dubb's that I would look at in terms of "Thing" are the ones from Day 2. I believe that Post #183 is pretty compelling for him being a scientist initially.

Without knowing for sure that there was a conversion on Night 1 (possible three Things) I'm not convinced that going after someone who was a scientist on Day 1 is the direction I want to go.

I think that Things either had two to start, with relatively unchecked conversions or three to start and were forced to make decisions on when to use a limited supply. After not getting caught in the vote on Day 1 I think it is entirely possible they banked one. But then they lost a Thing on Night 1 and another one on Day 2.

If we don't catch a Thing on this next vote I'm sure they would convert. We should be able to learn from Schmidty's Night 2 results post ... if it spells out that there was a conversion then we can make the intellectual leap that none transpired on Night 1.